Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 CONCE'P,NING S. P. KHI~OMOV ? S ARTICLE ENTTTLED "REVIEW OF THE AASTC CONCEPTS OF SYNOPTIC AN~LYSIS,t? G. D. ~ubyan Notea The following report appeared in M?teorologiya i Gidrologiya, No, 2 (October 1?~0 ? pages ~7-~3; as an answer to another article in the same issue, pages 20-26 Soviet investigators have contrubuted cox.siderably by their work to the theory and practice of analysis of traposplleric fronts. We find in their work versatile research an problems of kinematics and dynamics, displacements and deforr~ations space structure and cloud system of frontal separations, problems of frontogenesis and frontolysis, peculiarities of fronts and front activity in physica-geographical circumstances in various regions of our territory. A progressive step in the theory and practice of analysis of frontal separa- tions is achieved by the work by Kh. P. Pogosyan and the late N. L. Taborovskiy, fished in 19.8 and entitled "Advective-Dynamical Fundamentals of frontological publ analysis" (appearing in Trudy TsIF', as issue No. 7 (l9~ta j ). The work is a logical conclusion of previous research by the mentioned .authors and, first of all of investigations of cyclo- and anticyclo~enesis and of general circulation of the atmosphere. The work contains many new principles which cannot pass unr~aticed in practical work and in furthc,r research, Therefore we cannot agree with the basic statements of S. P. Khromov?s article, published in this issue; first of all we have to make the following remarks: l~hile announcing at the beginning of his article that the large size of Pogosyan?s and Taborovakiy~s work compels him to linger only on basic problems of ial ortance to practical. analysis, Khromov really acts differently. He is p Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 s discusser not the basic, but mostly secondary prablems; he diverts the bu y g 'm ortant results obtained by Pogosyan Taborovskiy and reader from the most 1 p s the readers orientation. It is probably done with the anten- thercfore confuse win that the work does not contain anything new; but ndetached con- t~.an of sho g unions and assumptiansE' (e.d. the distinction of warm and cold ,nASSes an topo- cl s the criticism of some assumptions connectedx with occlusion etc) graph~.c map , rrect and worth consideration in practical warkm How should we interpret are co 'se that lost in {hromov~s field of view were such important problems of otherwl , ical rneteorolagy the subject of investigation in the. work by Pogosyan and syn op t ' as kinematics. and dynamics of f'rontogenesis in the troposphere, '~aborovskay, omit variations of pressure, problems of analysis and f'ore- frontagenes~.s and dyn 'n of activity of frontal separations connected to the structure of file castx g boric field the frontogenesis and transfarrnation of attitudinal deforming thereto , fields etc. Can we seriously consider that prablems oi' terminology, e.g., how to name erial mass -polar ar temperate, - problems of geagrapllical classification an a of aerial masses and fronts, the distinction of warm and .cold aerial masses on ,.- x'c to o ra by etc, ar.~e more importa~:~it and more pressing than males of relat~.ve ba ~. p g P those mentioned above' Certainly not. In his article Khromov mentions several times the synthesis, the survey f connections between frontological conceptions and "ideas ... of advective a dynamical analysis". ram our oint of view, works on advective dynamical analysis, in particular F P e discussed work, do not consider the problem of synthesis or "survcS~ of th ~r~ revious assl~mptians, but anew and. more correct approach to connect~.ona w~.th p analysis ar~d to forecasting of atmospheric processes, -2-~ Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 The subject of triis new approach, of this .new method, is first of all the advecti~re dynamical theory of c~Tclo- and arita.cyclagenesis. From th.e point of vieaw of th:i.s thc;ory most processes of formation and development of cloudiness and of precipitations are connected ~~7ith ~"rantai. separations. GJith rospQct to cycla- and anticyclo~;enesis fronts possess signific~,r~.ce as zones of larger temperature contrasts, on which (contrasts) dynamic variations of pressure directly depend. The basis of the frontological method is .the undulG!tary theory of cyclo- genesis. The backers of this 1:~heory, including :~hromov, consider cyclogenesis as a process of generation and.develaprnent of undulatory disturbance on the front, while,. according to the advective dyna.aiic theory, waves on fronts are only .kinematic con.s~c~uences of dynamic pressure vari ations and. formation of depression. lly tYiis clarification it should. be plain what pogosyan and TaboravsGtiy mean, when. they write ~ ",A number? of investigations devotEd to problems of atmos~:~heric pressure variations and to the genesis of processes, completed by means of maps of boric topography, introduced here in 1937, proved that we may d7.scuss the develo ment of processes on basis of analysis of thermobaric fields of the tropo~ p s here without directly introducing fronts. This is based an the fact that p the effect of fronts on dynamics of the process is seen iri general in the hori- zontal gradients of temperature and pressure in the trapospl~rere. Therefore the single front drawn nEar the terrestrial surface may not supply indications with respect to further development of processes". By .quoting only a part of this phrase without repeating in full what the authors meant, Khromov speaks about the return to isobaric s~mop~ics, on the non- acknowledgement of the reality of fronts, with the purpose,. while being unable to produce some mare serious proofs, to scare the synopticians4 hel a ing attention to what is said in the end. of the third para.M We carnat P P y mav's article. ~e read there: "The introduction into synoptics graph of Khra ' ~ dimension may really give fruitful results, namely nn :basis of such of a th~.rd " in b the work of ~I. A. Tabarovskiy in 1911.7 and by its enjoy ~t that, audg g y review, the authors understood it", ' ~ cance is as a front and a frontal cyclogenesis, and we should solid frontolag~c ~- P abarovskiy never considered frontal cyclogenesis as a solid Pogasyara anc T Qn the contrary, they proved its inconsistency and worked out a new concept. is thears~~ of cycla- and anticycloger~esis. 7.'his is one of their ad.vective dynam ~ ' tic meteorolc~gy~ Khromov does not want to acknowledge it; basic mei?its ~.n synop ' nl "concepts" of ad.vective dynamical analysisa he menta.ons o y Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 doubts acid cannot doubt the reality of frontal separations; they Nobody b"ective reality. And the work discussed by us does not intend represent an a ~ 't of frontal separations, but9 on the contrary, looks for to deny the a.ctual~ y t methods of their analysis ? >?ogosyat~ and Taboravskiy and their neti~ mare perfec not den the xeality of e~.istence of frontal separations but the fo.~lawers do y n realit of a number of situa,ti.ons of frontological anal-Psis. This conzormity of y different i>~attex~, and Khromov and others quite uselessly try to zs aluite a contra The aboveWrnentianed quotation outlines and emphasizes conv~.nce us to the ~ " - ~ riot reat masses of a.trr~osphere take part in trie dynamics the unequivocal sli,udt~.on t ~ rocesses and therefore their analysis and forecasting could of tropospheric p s ed orl ana].ys is of thermal and boric f iE~1ds of the have better success, xf ba not an "the single front, drawn near the terr~str~:~::;.surface". troposphere, arld at this is not "a declaration of a possibility to menage without It a.s ev~.dent th fronts". Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 But independent of the wishful thinking individual. people, the theory of c cla- and anticyclogenesas by Pogosyaza and Taboravskay proved practically its y vitalit and its advantage as a more advanced and comp;Lete trieory, than the Y ui~duiatary one. the tr~ear~; of cycla- ?nd anticyclogenesas became the basis of much fruitful research. A predominant number of Soviet syn.opticians nowadays adhere to this theory. We thank it would be mor~e~ appropriate to apply just to Khromov his 'own words: "Is ~.t worthw'r~ile to retrograde synoptics?r'. Besides Khramov in his article repeats several. ta~~es the concept that edl '4the advective dynamical analysis rested until 1917 on concepts of alleg, y ad.vectaan and vErgence of asohyps, which did not reveal. the dynamical mechanism of the phenomena". ~,nd tnis is clearly presented, strangely einough, as an argument against the advective dynamical ar-,alysis, and in defense of the frontological method. Khr~omav?s statement is entirely incorrect. We do not consider it necp essary to return once more to this q~.:>.estion, and we refer the reader to our ' c .e, cf : f1~;eteorologiya i Gadralogiya" No. 3 (1q~9 Here we intend to arts 1 ~ draw atteritian to samethang elsea et us asstune that Khromov was aetuall~Y .right -that: nl~ntil 1~~.? the advective L dynamical analysis rested on concepts of advection and vergence, wathaut revealing the dynamical mechanism of the phenomena"e Well, what does it mean? `rhas was up to 191?, whale nawada3rs it is no more sa, which the author of the referred article does nat deny, Can such a statement constitute any argument against the advective dynamical analysis? Tn has tendency to deny the basic value of the whole collection of works an aclvectave dynamical. analysis as a new stage in the development of synoptic meteoro- Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 logy, in thc; tendency to refer everything new developed by the authars to simple "concepts" and therefore to back the insecure positions of frontal cyclop genesis, - Krlromov operates by such "ar~umencs". p~y reading Khromov~s article, people little experienced in synoptic meteoro- logy and n.ot farni~.iar with i.ts present state may be led to entirely false con- clusion~ what are ~bgos~~an 'I'abarovskiy worrying about? Why, synoptic meteorology attained perfection, due to fundamentals off' the old frontological analysis with its geographical classification of aerial masses and fronts and with its un- dula.cbory theory of cyclogenesis; and if .some dii'ficulties are invol~red in practical work, the synopticians are unablF~ to overcome them only because of lack of suffica.ent expera.ence. Zs it so? The problems of analysis and fareca.st.ng of atmospheric processes and of the weather, including the analysis of francs, require, despite successes achieved at first by the works of Soviet writers, further many-sided, persistent and pra~ found research, c1n].y in this way shall we be able to solve the ecanomibal pra~r lem, posed befor? us, consisting in radically improving weather forecasting. This is the path succ?ssfvlly followed by Soviet synopticians, and all possi- bilities are suppl~.ed t~ them along this line. Evidently the inexperience of tkie synopticians is not invol~red, but the theoretical.. and practical .weak paints of obsolete concoptso .alt is dust from this point of view that we discuss the work by ~'ogosyan and Taborovskiyo In this work fronts are investigated from new positions and metriods to improve the analysis, and the forecasting of really existing tropospheric frontal separations are marked. In such posing of the proLlem we see the praM gressive value of the specified worko Zt is possible and useful to submit to scientific criticism some position established by the authars It a.s an1.y ?b- Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 advanta~;eaus for the subject. But it is hardly possible to deny its value for analysis and forecasting in order to back obsolete concepts, as it is done by Khromov. ~,,f By inj~~estigating the frontogenesis and the frantalysis in attitudinal deform- ing fields, ~ogosyan and Taborovskiy establish important states, revealing internal. 8onnections of frontagenesis and frontolysis in various ,parts of the alti~udinal frontal gone. On the other side, they came to the conclusion that from the point of view of dynamical reaction an tie evolution of atmospheric processes "it is necessary to distinguish two types of frontogenesiss the basic frantagenesis in the troposphere in general and the froritogenesis in tie near- ground friction layer",-the so called near-ground frc~ntogEnesis, which is con- ditioned by the convergence cif friction and appe~~rs only at nesx-ground levels. Spatial analysis of frontal separations sho~rs that indeed fronts exist, the formation of which is due nearly exclusively to canv~~rgence of the ground level wind and which exist only at ground level. ;In variance from tropospheric fr~z~ts, in which formation aerial masses of considerable de~~th of the troposphere take part, tYiese fronts have no essential effect on the development of processes, The. separation of fronts on tropospherical a.nd on ground level ones helps. the synop- tician in correct orientation in the analysis. In his article Khromov first tries to deny the necessity of front separation an tropospherical and ground level; later he says there is nothing new in it, and a little further he says "... we see a sufficient analogy between the main fronts and tropospheric fronts by the authors, and. between the secondary fronts and. the ground level frants by the authors". It is rather difficult to under- Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 metimes in the access as well as in the delta larger than ~t5?. angles are so ewe should not deny the possibility of an indiva.dual frontolysis in 'i'heref ar ss of the frontal zone and. of frontogenesis in the delta. The word the acre ,~ ~s" in the uoted definition should be replaced by the ward 'usually"~ alw ay q 'in the roblems of dynami:~s of the tropospherical frontogenesis the S Ludy g p thors of "Advective I:)yriamical ~{undamenta].s" deduce remarkable conclusions, au which Khromov prefers to keep silent. These conclusions are the following: on Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 mov, In any case, we should remark that ground level and secondary stand Khro ' entical already because the latter may occur not only an fronts are not id , so in the troposphere, although weakly indic4ted in the ground 1 eve],, but al he tro os here. The main and the tropaspherica~. fronts are thermal f~.eld oft p p ' entical neither, because not all tropospherical fronts are the main. ones. not ld sential and new matter in the separation of fronts at tropospherical This ~.s the es ? d of local frontogenes~.s. The f ~rst is defined as frontogenesis o.~ ~nd.~v~.dual an and ground levels conse uence of the investigation of the kinematics of frontogenesis AnothE r ~, establishment by ~'ogosyan and Taboravskiy of concepts in the troposphere ~.s the . ~ in air valtune, the second as frontogenesis in a spcycified location. of the sh~.f t g os an and. Ta.boravskiy write in their work that f'the observed structure Pag y ~, e of these conce~~ts becomes obvious when the authors pass to their she s~gnif~.c2nc 'nvesti anon results of dynamics of the tropospherical frontogenesis. o~.~tl~.ne of ~. g :> ewe treat this subject it is necessary to make the following remark: Lut bef or ? ~ e not below 1~5? which is not always the case; i,eW these hips and. 15otherms ar a efinition assumes that in the whole frontal zone the angles between isop ,such a d thcrmoba.ric field of access a11d delta are such, that in the access always of ' ual frontogenesis exists, and in the del~tsa. an individual frontolysis," an a.nd.iva.d Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 ~% ' onnection between individual frontogenes~.s ~~; ,;, 1) There e~:ists a well define c ~~ ' ations (Footnote: Th~.s connectian is and. d amical pressure v~.,r~ ;, (frontolysis yn ' for a particular case, when dynamic ablished by Pogo$Yan and Taborovsk~.y ence of est sed in relation to convergence and da.verg pressure variatians are d~.scus ' ned b~,. T. ~'. Vetlov? ) ' connection in a general case is abtax ~ ' isohyps only. Th~.s ~; ,res:.~ui~e -~.ncrease; individual - enesis is accompa~~i~'d by d~na~~d-cal (Individual frontog ~~~~~ ?s b dynamical pressure drop). frontolys~. Y oval frantogenesis, ane can obtain a su ? ~? ~ ~lependa.n~; on the type of 1 ) ~ n of dynamical pressure variation m fete representation of accel~,rata.o ficiently co p amical pressure variation ~.ncrease; case. of local frontogenes-~.s the ~ (~ the .tai sis they decrease). in the case of local fr~?n y ents for the analysis and practical value of these statem Th8 theOT'et1Ca1 ? ses is so evident, that it is useless d the forecasting of atmaspher~.c proces -. an the practical ,', e successfully applzed a.n '. to d~_scuss them These statements ar ~tral ~'orecas~ting Instit~lte p ".' procedure of the Cei roblem of the ~`~ ~ return again to the p their ~aark Pogosyan and faborovskiy In the discuss them in titudinal deforming fields, y origin and transformation of al ~nesis based on statements obtained by r~nectiori with troposphc~ra.cal frantUge ca nami.cs of this process, ;; ~~ anon of lone, at~.cs and dy them as resti~.ts of investig 'n this problem widen \ new a proacl~. Canclusiorls deduced i which is a bas:~.cal.ly p axe valuable for wider analyse-S and representations, deepen them, and previous ~ rmation and transformation of ossibilities of forecasting the fo improve the p ? ~, attention whould be paid to this par ~" alt:ituda.nal deform~.ng fields. ~pc.ci C of work. Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 It is not enough to talk about three-dimensional front analysis; it is necessary to find means for its realization, '1'o this topic, an essential part of "Advective dynamical fundarnentals~~ is devoted. the basin of actually realizing the three-dimensx.onal anal s's y x of front separation is seen by Begosya and Taborovskiy in 11inseparable connection of structure of motian arld activity of fronts with a thermobaric tropos here fie p ld'~ . From this point of view, also essentially new, they proceed in their a.nvesti gatzons. ~n one side they prove the fertility and pract~.cal accessibility of their meth od, and. on the other side they lead to a number of i-nportar~t conclusions with - res pect to connections of fronts with the structure of the thermobar' ie troposphere field ~~i genera, and with the attitudinal frontal zone in ~artic I ular9 with respect to accentuation and blurring, to dynamical significance, spatial. structure of frontal separations etc, It is fully evident that these investigations are not exhaustive. Much work remains to be done inthis respect, in particular in the study of formation processes and in the development of frontal cloudiness and precipit~tians. Besides, some separate conclusions could be made more recise br . p ~ the authors, eQg., the problem of the structure of the warm acclus ion front. :Cnv estigations show that although these fronts have i,n most casesdurin th g e winter a structure represented by the scheme of ~'ogosyan and_ Taborovskiy, nevertheless occlusion francs with a warm front of great vertical extent are not excluded. ~.lso the problem of the criterion of temperature contrast requires more precision. But this is not essential. 't'he most important matter for us is that the dmscusse d axticle marks basically new, from our point of view, and correct methods of analysis and forecasting of frontal separations a~Zd. its activities and an autM look for its furt~ler research, Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Still a few words on "bent" occlusion fronts, having much importance for the front analysis and the comprehension of tree regeneration process of cyclones, research by the writer of this article (cf: "i~eteorologiya i Gidralogiya, ?~ja. 1 (1950)) shows that the statement by Pogosyan and Taborovskiy on the im- possibility of the existence of "bent" occlusion front corresponds to truths The wrong concept an the. reality of "bent" occlusions is the result of one- sided intez~~retation based on exceptional analysis of kinematic conditions and front lizles on the ground.-level synoptic mapo In his article Khromov left much roam to the problem of beo~raphical class- ification of aerial masses and fronts He first writes that "the geographical classification of masses actually has na direct forecasting value", but later om he writes: "nevertheless geographical classification is rather essential for an.atysis, and therefore indirectly for forecasting. The geographical type of mass, correctly determined, suppla.es us with a natl~ral complex. of weather conditions, within the range of condensed characteristics of its s~rstem (far a specified tir~~e and. location}~~, These two. statements are essentially contra-~ dictory. We do not intend to discuss whether geographical classification of aerial masses and fronts is necessary to climatologists or not, but it cannot serve as a pillar, even indirectly, far the analysis and forecasting of weather and for the investigation of atmospheric processes. This is corroborated by long years of experience of practical ~.Zd research work. We also should keep in mind that not "condensed characteristics" and not "natural complex" are required from a synoptician, but a concrete forecasting, r. estraincd to a narrow range and con- taining information an all weather elements. Such forecasting can be completed Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 u i~ t4 5 -~t r~~, ~ICa'~ only only on the basis of many-sided physical nnnalysis of atmospheric processes, deriving from distribution and interaction of meteorological elements in the specified time period and in the marked region we do not disguise .ourselves by dialec~trics, but try to understand it, we I~ hardl have to prove the necessity of geographical classification of aC~~lal masses Y and fronts. Then it will be useless to menace with s'nihilistic chaos", but it will be necessary to acknowledge the correctness af' the remark that "concepts of arctic and polar fronts, taken as basis of an analysis of a synapi~ic map, as a e lead to difficulties, which could be aboided only by the formalization of rul ical anal sis. It proved. necessary not only to count with real processes, frontalog y ze them rota frames defined by accepted terminology of fronts and but to squee classification of aerial masses". We cannot blame pogosyan and '~'aborovskiy in their illogicalness in this roblem. Say denying, and quite correctly, the theoretical and practical nec- p essit of geographical classification of aerial masses, they offered in their y work instead of one classification another one. Later they nevertheless acknow- ' .error b agreeing to consider it a kind of scientific liberalism, ledged their , y which we consider useful to mention here. ludin~ our article we ojuote an excerpt from the work by~S'ogosyan In cane g and Taborovskiy; "The main deficiency of the method of f'rontological analysis is Just that er which the ~Sorwegian school considered its rational basis, namely; to place matt remast the kinematic characteristics of processes and to leave to a secondary fo the d amic characteristics. Mean~l~ne it became obvious, after works on role yn ' d amical analysis and after the theoretical. research by I. A. Kibel, advect~.ve yn should be assigned in the evolution of synaptic processes to that a basa.c role istics resulting from pxoperties of thermabaric troposphere dynamical character , M12~ Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4 fields. The advantage of this new viewpoint effected the theory of cyclo~- and anticyclogenesiso The Norwegian school, by deviating from basic kinematic characteristics in their investigations of cyclogenesis, met difficulties and did not advance beyond. a qualitative description off' the process. As for anticycl4~- genPSis, it wa,s virtually left out of the discussiono 'The new point of view, based on the approximate hydrodynamical theory of baroclinnic atmosphere, in our opinion, handles these difficulties with more success and brings the investigation straight to the possibility of quantitative control", I~hromov cannot reconcile himself with this obvious and accomplished fact? This does not prevent him from being objective ire the evaluation of the signifi- cance of the reviewed work, in which the frontal separations, as quoted in detail above, are investigated.frorn basically new positions on a higher theore- tical levelo The work by Pogosyan and ~?aborovski.y "Adveetive T~ynamical Fundamentals of Frontnlogical.Analysis" should be a subject of careful study by synopticians as a work of great importance on the path of improvement of a~~alysis and fore- casting of atmospheric processes and weather. Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/10 :CIA-RDP82-000398000100230020-4

plus-circle Add Review

comment

Reviews